Is Paris burning?

CBC's longtime foreign correspondent Paul Workman is being replaced in Paris next June by David Common who got a juicy offer from Global TV to jump ship.

CBC obviously topped that offer, or made him one he could not refuse, a three-year deal complete with French lessons and other standard-issue foreign correspondent perks. The deal has just been concluded.

Recall that, unlike other contract news workers such as the Washington-based Henry Champ, Workman refused (scroll down) to file during the current management lockout of 5,500 Canadian Media Guild Workers, now in heading into its eighth week. He has been on ''unauthorized leave'' at least since the beginning of September.

Workman has served many years overseas, including in the Middle East and during the Iraq war. (I'd point you to his bio on the CBC site, except the CBC site is a joke right now, devoid of most of its taxpayer-funded archives. It doesn't even present both sides of the lockout story, linking only to the management web site.)

CBC -- which refuses to admit that Common has landed the post because, after all, according to the rules, this should be an open competition -- says that the end of Workman's run in Paris has nothing to do with his showing solidarity with his Canada-based colleagues walking the line.

Indeed, CBC news honcho Tony Burman told me today that Workman has enjoyed several contract extensions in Paris and has known for a while the the third and final contract expires June 2006.

"Our desire is that he return to Toronto,'' said Burman. "Clearly there would be a very senior position available to him here. It's really up to Paul what he chooses to do."

While I believe Burman, this looks very very bad on CBC right now.

UPPITY DATE: Burman just called. He says that formal boards for jobs like this are decided on a case-by-case basis.

Comments

Hoe did Common negotiate a deal while he is locked out? This is a bad move for Common if he ever hopes to have good professional relations with his colleagues ever again.

[Darwin O'Connor]

There is nothing wrong with the CBC only linking to the management view on the lockout. cbc.ca is both a news site and a corparate site. The link is clearly separate from the news section. It is located on the the side right below the non-news non-balanced Shop link. cbcunlocked.ca has almost exactly the same layout, with a Canadian Media Guild link on the side.

The CBC has just as much right to put a link for the companies views on its home page as GM would on its home page.

[Antonia Z]

CBC is not GM or any other company. It is a public broadcaster that explicitly states in its journalistic policy that it must be fair and balanced. (And isn't calling it a ''labour disruption'' a tad disingenuous? It's a lockout.) That said, I agree that CBC Unlocked should carry both links as well.

[walking wounded]

Okay, so let me get this straight. David Common has been picketing with us for the past 7 weeks, telling people - including me - how monumentally stupid he thought management was. Meanwhile, he's negotiating a sweet deal for himself - which probably includes a six-figure salary and perks - post lockout. Got it. Classy David, really classy.

[Working Stiff]

It is true that Paul was told this some time ago.Many of us
found the decision difficult to understand.But it was also clear David was being groomed for a foreign posting long before the lockout.
With no discourtesy to David's talents,it will be many years before he will match Paul,who is an exceptional journalist. I am very sad.

By the way, this so called "working stiff" is Locked out.

[Darwin O'Connor]

Re: Website link

I'm saying the part of the site with the link is clearly not ment to be journalism, but corporate information. By your argument the program guide link should include Global's prime time schedule and the Shop link should feature Canadian Idol CDs in the name of balance.

[jenkew]

Did anyone point-blank ask Tony Burman whether David Common is really taking over the Paris job?

There appears to be some confusion over this. As of Friday night, Mr. Common is telling his colleagues "there is no deal."

WTF?

[CBC Supporter]

Paul Workman is without a doubt one of the best journalists at the CBC. Speaking as someone who worked on the newsdesk there for several years, it was ALWAYS a pleasure to work with Paul. No one compares to him. I hear he does not want to come back to Canada, so I will be surprised if he returns. It would be a tragedy to lose him.

[Locked out]

A response to Mr. O'Connor:

FYI...The corporate site for CBC is http://www.cbc.radio-canada.ca/home.asp.

The left hand nav bar of CBC.ca is not supposed to be a propaganda section for management. It defeats the purpose of having a news site.

You can't compare CBC.ca and CBCUnlocked. For one, the latter's doing a more classy and more competent job of servicing the public with a lot less resources and money.

For another, CBC.ca and the "news" you see there now are supposed to uphold CBC journalistic standards: fair and balanced. It should attempt to show all sides of the issue. The locked out version of CBC.ca does not do that. Not only does it ignore the story of the locked out workers, it fails to show the union's side of the story.

CBC management by doing this has changed CBC.ca into a propaganda tool -- not the balanced news site it's supposed to be.

CBC is supposed to be a public broadcaster, funded by our money. CBC.ca is supposed to be supplying Canadians with unbiased news. It's failing to do that.

CBCUnlocked is NOT being funded by taxpayers. It's run by volunteers -- locked out CBC workers who ARE NOT getting paid a cent for doing what they're doing. They are also using a lot less resources than current CBC management. But it seems to have a lot more content than what's on CBC.ca.

What does that tell you? Apparently CBC is using money for something else other than programming.

How sad for all of us.

-Locked out

[Antonia Z.]

In response to Jenkew, yes. I did. I got no comment, for obvious reasons -- although I did get confirmation on Workman's recall next June. (Burman stressed that it had nothing to do with the lockout.)

Perhaps Common is correct in the strictest sense in that there is no signed deal -- but I can tell you that he had a very firm offer, which he received in writing, and was most definitely in negotiations. There was, at the very least, an ''understanding" with Burman.

I must add however that there was also a confidentiality agreement tied to the CBC's offer which may have been broken -- rendering the understanding ''null and void."

Ergo, no deal.

I stand by my post.

CBCUnplugged does link to both side of this issue, the Guild and the CBCnegociations websites...

[colin]

David...Way to go!!!! NOt a bad little promotion...for someone I always thought sounded like a High school reporter..Does he even shave yet? Sorry but reporting the big stories I find hard to take him seriously

[T.R.Y.]

A little math. The CBC lockout commenced Aug. 15. It's now Oct. 1. If I got it right, today it's in
into its 48th day, with no end in sight. Meanwhile of course life goes on, and people (read: viewers
and listeners) have long made the adjustments to their viewing and listening routines. Habits that
in many instances no longer include CBC. The longer this lockout lasts the more new viewing/listening habits sans CBC will harden. CBC's audience will
shrink, thereby imperilling public broadcasting as
an institution. As things stand, the CBC is making
itself increasingly irrelevant - the deadbeat Dad among broadcasters. Even those who love CBC will, I
fear, abandon it precisely because they feel it's
abandoned them in a sense. After 60 CBC-less days
the Arrrrgh!... of frustration will start turning
into a mild shrug among its many fans. Higher up, I
fear this may well be the goal: to kill off the CBC by a kind of institutional suicide.

[jenkew]

"I can see clearly now, the rain is gone..."

Rock on, Antonia. What a web these guys are weaving...

[OntheLine]

Antonia, I've really appreciated your reporting during the CBC lockout - but you've done David Common a huge injustice. As have the people who've posted about him without knowing the whole story first.
Did you try to reach him for his side of the story before you wrote what you did?
At least someone did.
http://www.robinrowland.com/garret/
You owe him an apology.

[Antonia Z.]

I am not sure what injustice I committed. I never commented on Common's character or his career. I merely presented the facts. None of them seem to be in dispute.

They are:

1. Common received a firm offer of the Paris bureau from CBC during the lockout, in writing, and bound by a confidentiality agreement. (By commenting on the offer, as he knows, he would have rendered it ''null and void.")

2. Workman is being recalled.

3. I state, and quote Burman to the same effect, that there is no connection between the lockout and the recall.

I offer no comparisons between Common's work and Workman's.

I do not imply that Common had Workman bounced.

I say nothing negative about Common at all.

I am not responsible for the ire of Common's locked out colleagues, or any inferences they make from these facts, in the comments section of my blog or any other blog. I merely report what goes on in the Canadian media bizz.

It was media news that the veteran Workman was being recalled. (Big news judging by the fuss that is now being generated over it.) I would have blogged it even if there wasn't a lockout. I would have blogged Common's offer as well.

While I am sorry that it appears to have caused Common pain, and that it has brought out some pretty nasty feelings by others at a difficult time, I am not sure what I have to apologize to Common for.

Finally, while I admit I did not try to contact Common for ''his side of the story," I wasn't presenting ''sides." I was reporting that Paul Workman was leaving Paris and that Common would replace him.

Welcome to the blogosphere.

[blather]

How does Antonia owe David Common an apology? From what I've read, it seems she pretty much got it right...and if not for her, this little secret arrangement would have remained a secret. CBC is pulling Workman out of Paris - Tony Burman confirms that was in the works. CBC has David Common in mind for a foreign posting - David Common confirms that was in the works, although he claims Paris was just one of many possibilities. Either way, it doesn't matter. I have no opinion on this one way or the other...and at the moment I suspect Mr. Common is trying to save face with his locked out brethren so he'll say anything - but to me, a locked out employee contacting management, even if to get "something in writing," whether it be promises of salary or assignment - is in negotiations.

[walking wounded]

There's actually a simple way for David to clear his name, if as he claims, there were no negotiations and he and management were speaking in generalities about a future foreign posting.

David, next time you're on the line, show up with your "something in writing" from management. If all it says is you will get a foreign posting sometime next year, then you have nothing to worry about. But if there's mention of salary, perks, which foreign bureau you'll be assigned to, etc., then, my friend, you were in fact negotiating with management during a lockout. A big no-no.

[Anonymous]

To the Walking Wounded:

I too am a walking wounded, and hate this entire mess, but based on what we know, you're being too hard on David. Let's assume that Global did make him another offer after the lockout began. Sounds pretty plausible. Would it have been better for him to have simply left the CBC without first checking about what they had to offer in return? Exactly how would that have benefited us -- any of us, including those on the outside? Clearly, he had to go to management and tell them that Global was offering him "X". (He does have a new baby and a new mortgage and is currently employed in a menial job outside the TBC while always picketing.) Obviously, all this is NEGOTIATIONS, but, as bad as that is, how's the alternative better? Or should he have simply said 'no' to Global?

David's apparent fault is that he 1) "bumped off" Dan Bjarnason in what really was one of management's most disgraceful moves in all my years at the CBC and 2) now apparently "bumped off" our picket line hero -- and I mean that seriously -- Paul Workman. The fault is management's alone: for mistreating Dan and for starting this insane lockout which must have prompted Global to prey on our stars.

My last question -- and I doubt Antonia will answer it -- is who leaked this and why now? Whatever we think of David, I can't imaging him doing it, and whatever we think of management, I can't imagine Tony doing it either. So who and why?

[Antonia Z.]

Thank you Anonymous for bringing some sanity into this.

Two things:

I missed the whole Dan Bjarnason episode, a story which has been recounted to me since the start of the lockout and worth retelling as soon as I can get ''both sides'' to talk. All I have is two very credible third party versions.

The other thing is who leaked the David Common offer and why. You're right. You won't be getting an answer from me.

[OntheLine]

If you don't think it would have been more fair to include that Burman had talked to David about Paris BEFORE the lockout and that in fact was having French lessons paid for by CBC two years ago then I won't belabour the point with you.
Some people find it difficult to say they are sorry.

[Lemony Picket]

When you say negotiating during a lockout is a no-no, you are absolutely right. BUT....in this case, Global was about to poach one of our best and brightest. (If you were paying attention during the London bombings, you know David's work was EXTRAORDINARY and the same goes for his reporting from Afganistan, Haiti, and good old Saskatchewan). The poor guy was in a tough spot. The timing was bad, really bad, but he had to know CBC had something worth sticking around for. What the hell was he supposed to do? It's sad that another of our best and brightest (Paul Workman) got caught in the crossfire (David probably didn't even know Paul's circumstances and probably feels terrible now he does) but that's the fault of our senior managers. THEY treated Paul badly and I hope CMG negotiates a special Paul Clause to get him back at work.

[steve rocker]

I really respect the stand Paul Workman has taken during the lockout, and I think he is an excellent journalist, and an asset to the CBC.

I also worked with David Common for several years in Regina, and I always found him to be courteous, good-humoured, professional and hard-working. I respect him as a colleague and a friend.

None of this has changed either opinion.

[anonymous]

What exactly does "welcome to the blogosphere" mean? That you don't have to check facts before reporting something?

You certainly wouldn't "present the facts," as you say, in The Star without a courtesy call to the principles involved to see whether what you're writing is actually true or not.

If you want to be taken seriously in "the "blogosphere," do your homework.

[Antonia Z.]

Well Mr./Ms. Anonymous, I'll tell you what ''Welcome to the blogosphere" means.

It means anonymous people such as yourself can pop in and make inflammatory comments about others, without having to back them with a name or a face.

It means anonymous people flaming other anonymous people.

It means people like you get to insult me on my own blog, and do so from behind an electronic screen.

It means taking my straight-forward and unchallenged (on the facts) posting about Paul Workman and David Common and amplifying it, through the aforementioned flame wars, into a conspiracy, or a defamatory attack.

This is what happened here.

I find the viciousness that this story has provoked, here and on other blogs, really breathtaking. It makes me weep for CBC.

That's what Welcome to the blogosphere means.

Go. Have a tour. Be sure to read the other anonymous comments. I am sure you'll find many kindred souls.

http://cbcunplugged.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2005/10/2/1275260.html

http://cbcunplugged.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2005/9/30/1272153.html

http://robinrowland.com/garret/index.html